In search of the holy grail of Rucksacks

[cyphyr]

Hi gang
My first post on a new forum
I am looking to buy a new rucksack to replace my old Karrimor Cougar 65+15. My requirements are that it fits (adjustable back) is not too big (45L - 65l max) and is tough enough to handle a life of being dragged through thorn bushes.
The ideal pack so far would be the Karrimor SF Sabre 45 together with its PLCE expansion pockets. Small enough for weekend use yet with the ability to expand for longer journeys.
BUT its a fixed back system.
Pretty much the same is true of the SnugPak RocketPak, the main compartment is a little smaller and the PLCE pockets are a little larger (15L each)
BUT its a fixed back system.
Then I took a look at the Lowe Alpine Sting (ignore the weight it says its 3.4kg but on review its 1.6kg see here). So far looks ideal but it seems to pretty much not exist any more (even the camo version which I don't want has vanished from the stores).
I have seen very little else that comes close to fitting my requirements.
So can anyone recommend a tough, 45L to 65L(max), adjustable back (to fit 19"-20") and preferable with PLCE or MOLLE? expansion capability?
Money is not an issue (lol within reason), but getting something that works is!
Thanks in advance
Richard

 

[_mark_]

http://www.cadetdirect.com/products2.php?subcat=247 (no affiliation to site)

 

[Shewie]

Sting for sale here in the classifieds ...

http://www.bushcraftuk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=61668&highlight=lowe+alpine+sting

And welcome to the forum

 

[Bardster]

the Tatomka Tasmanian Tiger Range are bomb proof. I have the Pathfinder which has to go up for sale will regret it but just dont use it and moving house means getting rid of kit. Adjustable back as specified and 85l which includes the two side pouches which can be used together or seperatly with their own straps. http://intranet.tatonka.com/infosys/infocgi/artintt9.dll?7600_TT_Pathfinder&0

 

[sapper1]

Why do you need an adjustable back?Just buy one the correct size.Most adjustable backs are heavier because of the adjustment system,which once set is never used again.
I have been through many different rucksacks and then I asked myself what do I really need.The answer I came up with was :-Light,hard wearing,as close to waterproof as possible and the correct capacity
.
I ended up going for a Golite Jam2.

 

[Shewie]

Why do you need an adjustable back?Just buy one the correct size.Most adjustable backs are heavier because of the adjustment system,which once set is never used again.
I have been through many different rucksacks and then I asked myself what do I really need.The answer I came up with was :-Light,hard wearing,as close to waterproof as possible and the correct capacity
.
I ended up going for a Golite Jam2.

I often wondered that myself Chris, what is the purpose of an adjustable back, like you say surely you just buy one that fits to start with ?

What do you think the to Jam ? I've been looking at a few lightweight packs lately but not taken the plunge yet.

 

[Nat]

Thats one thing about the Sting i've never got my head around. Once adjusted why bother adjusting it again unless you're going to give it to someone else! The sting is a cracking bag, but i'm considering flogging mine

 

[sapper1]

I often wondered that myself Chris, what is the purpose of an adjustable back, like you say surely you just buy one that fits to start with ?

What do you think the to Jam ? I've been looking at a few lightweight packs lately but not taken the plunge yet.

Taken to PM to keep thread on track.

 

[cyphyr]

I guess the reason I need the Adjustable back is that I'm on the taller side (6'4" on a good day) but I'm not after a massive pack. I'm only going to be using it for a couple of days to a week at a time. The Karrimor Sabre 45 and the RocketPak would be ideal were it not for the fixed back length. It probably would not be an issue for the "couple of days" trips, but after a week or so of not having a working waist strap its going to become a royal pain. (If the back length is too short all the weight will be carried on the shoulders thus rendering the belt next to useless). Unfortunately I seem to be very limited on choice looking for an adjustable back (or long back) sack in a sub 65 (preferably sub 50) liter size. The choice gets even less when I throw in a requirement for aPLCE or MOLLE? expansion capability.
I looked at the TT range and theres a lot of execelent kit there, I'm liking Rucksack TT Operation Bag olivgreen. I cant seem to find any real details on TT's site about back systems etc.
I've been reccomended the Jam before but I'm just not sure about its durability.
Plenty to think about
Richard

 

[sapper1]

Hi Richard,I had the same problems as you with the sabre and the rocket pack,I'm also 6'4".I just sold a vulcan that was the correct size for me.It was a brilliant pack but just too heavy when empty so it had to go in favour of a lighter one.Mainly I'm out bushcrafting and hiking so this is the view I was taking when looking for a new pack.
Here's a copy of the PM I sent to Shewie,hope this helps.

I've come to PM to save taking the thread off topic.
So far it knocks spots of anything I've had up to now.
The good points:-
Super light,4lbs lighter than the vulcan
super strong,it's made with dyneema
Plenty of room ,it says it's 51L but it seems to be more like 60-65L
built in compression system that will either close the sides in,the bottom in ,the whole sack in or use all together
the compression system also doubles up as a carrying system across the front off the pack.To give you an I dea it's designed to carry a snowboard or skis.
The hip belt is a proper hip belt,not a waist strap,the hip belt also has pockets on it.Brilliant idea,I'm surprised ALL packs don't have this
hydration sleeve inside with pipe outlets either side
side pocketa at the bottom of the pack either side on the outside for poles or water bottle or whatever
removeable foam back pad rather than aluminium frame
Emergency whistle on the adjustable height chest strap
Roll top lid rather than a fullcover lid
Strap to secure the roll top lid or be used as an extra carrying point.
I wasn't sure about the lid but have had no problems with water getting in at all,also it allows for extra capacity to be carried.
It comes in green ,blue and black/grey.
All in all it suits me as I've really lightened up my kit so I'm not carrying heavy bulky kit any more.
To give you an idea of what it will hold:-
4 season down sleeping bag
silk liner
fullsize thermarest (folded and placed vertically against back pad)
bivi bag
tarp
cookset(pot,cup, stove ,fuel ,spork,1 litre water bottle,)
waterproofs
food for 3 days
first aid kit
paperback
full set of spare clothes
wash kit
headlight
hand torch
groundsheet
and there's still plenty of room
have a look here

http://www.ultralightoutdoorgear.co.uk/home.html

If you google golite jam 2 review you won't find a bad one.
If you need to know more ,just ask.
Cheer
Chris

 

[beachlover]

Another vote for the Golite Jam here.
No durability issues. No Army wannabe looks and the weight reduction when I moved to it from my Kifaru Zulu was in itself a revelation, but led to my reviewing all my kit in the end.

 

[johnboy]

Why do you need an adjustable back?Just buy one the correct size.Most adjustable backs are heavier because of the adjustment system,which once set is never used again.

I often wondered that myself Chris, what is the purpose of an adjustable back, like you say surely you just buy one that fits to start with ?

Thats one thing about the Sting i've never got my head around. Once adjusted why bother adjusting it again unless you're going to give it to someone else! The sting is a cracking bag, but i'm considering flogging mine

If you have a pack with a fixed back length that is available in a range of sizes then life is rosy. The Bergahus Vulcan is a good example of this you buy the one that fits the best and away you go.

Sacks like the Sabre 45 have just 1 back length so if it fits then hey ho crack on. If not then you'll need to look elsewhere.

With a daysack and light loads having a sack that fits well and shares the weight between hips and shoulders is less important. If you're starting to carry 60+ ltrs of kit ( sabre 45 +side pockets Predator + pouches + omni pockets) you're going to want to ensure that the weight distribution between hips and shoulders is spot on if you are carrying weight for any real distance. IMHO that is why sacks like the Predator / Sabre 45 need to be chosen carefully especially if you are going to add on all of the side pockets and omni pouches etc. A waist belt clipped around your stomach is not doing any good weight distribution wise.

An adjustable back allows the manufacturer to produce 1 sack that fits a number of different sized people. So for the Sting on issue to the Dutch army it makes a lot of sense soldiers come in various sizes so you issue 1 bergen and it's going to fit the vast majority of them.

I have a Sting and Vulcan and recently a well used Sabre 45 in black. The Sabre doesn't fit me, the Sting does but the Vulcan is the most comfortable.

HTH

Cheers

John

 

[Paul_B]

Late to this post but I got an Aiguille Alpine sack custom made to my back length and in my choice of fabric colour and spec. It cost about halfway between two of their models because it borrowed design elements from both. Seemed fair to me. Anyway they make their own stuff above their shop in Stavely near Kendal so can make special orders for pretty much what the standard stock sizes cost. No extra charges (within reason because I am sure they will accept complete custom jobs too).

They are basically simple sacks made out of old style fabrics and seem very tough to me. They make for regiments who allow for private gear purchases too also MRTs. I saw a sack that had two tubes on the front of the sack to take some gas and oxygen tanks also in bright red and with scotchlite reflective stuff on it.

It might not suit you though but it could be worth looking. I got mine and it was all black with a longer back. I don't get on withthe central alloy stave but that is coming out now I have lighter gear so it should make a good sack at less than 1kg without the stave or about 1 or 1.1kg with it. Anyway my sack was 46litres at the standard size but with the extra length I estimate it to be about 50 - 55litre.

Just an idea but for £90 it is not too expensive.

Personally I like Crux sacks. very tough being meant for alpine climbing and hauling up climbing routes and the like but heavy at 1.3kg or so IIRC. Good carry for up to about 25kg or more for the AK47 47litre sack also 57 and 67 litre IIRC.

 

[Paul_B]

Fixed back but several sizes. IMHO a fixed back is not an inferior option to an adjustable back system. I say this because not everyone knows the best back length anyway. SOme retailers use the Lowe ALpine measuring thingy to get it right for customers but most don't so the fixed back at the right size isprobably just as good in real use.

 

[EdS]

Paul_B beat me to it. Have a word with Aguille.

 

[oetzi]

Adjustable or not is not of any importance if it fits.
A fixed-lenght-pack, properly selected, beats an adjustable one, bought to bought to make it somehow fit by adjusting it, every time.
That said, all you need is someone to help you selecting it by trying it on with a reasonable weight in it.

 

[ScarletPimpernel]

+1 for Tasmanian Tiger. I have the Mission pack and find it very comfortable and useable.